Proposal for new law regarding carry
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Proposal for new law regarding carry

  1. #1

    Proposal for new law regarding carry

    No business or or gov't facility (including the post office, Amtrak, etc.) may prohibit weapons on their premisses unless they
    1) have metal detectors and use them on everyone - no exceptions for anyone
    2) have armed guards to protect those within
    3) Either
    a)provide armed escort to and from the parking facility
    b)provide secure storage for those who carry to and from the facility
    The above regulations would also apply to employees who would have to be supplied with armed escorts to and from their parking facility, bus stop, etc. should they request it.

    This would be too expensive for most and so we would go back to the sensible position of liberty put forth by our founding fathers where the right is not infringed - period.

  2.   
  3. #2
    No way the "gubmint" is going to put those restrictions on themselves.

    I totally agree with the storage, tho.
    If some business or gov't agency is going to tell me I can't exercise my 2A right on their property, fine. But they should have to provide insured storage for my piece while I am on their premises. Otherwise they are , in effect, denying me my 2A rights while en route to and from their property. For instance, if I need to walk the four blocks from my Apt to the courthouse, I can't carry my piece. What if I am attacked halfway there?




    .
    In the beginning, the patriot is a scarce man -- brave, hated, and scorned. But when his cause succeeds, the timid join him. For then, it costs nothing to be a patriot. -- Mark Twain

  4. #3
    There is precedent here in Washington state.

    RCW 9.41.300: Weapons prohibited in certain places ? Local laws and ordinances ? Exceptions ? Penalty.

    ... the local legislative authority shall provide either a stationary locked box sufficient in size for pistols and key to a weapon owner for weapon storage, or shall designate an official to receive weapons for safekeeping, during the owner's visit to restricted areas of the building. The locked box or designated official shall be located within the same building used in connection with court proceedings. The local legislative authority shall be liable for any negligence causing damage to or loss of a weapon either placed in a locked box or left with an official during the owner's visit to restricted areas of the building.

    I can attest, having done jury duty in King County in 2006, that it's a pretty easy, painless thing. I showed up at entrance, and calmly told the security folks that I had a firearm I needed to check. The security folks said to the uniformed deputy on duty there, "We need an escort". That's the polite euphemism they use at the King County courthouse. Doesn't "scare the horses".

    The deputy head nodded and motioned for me to come over to him. I waited there a minute or two, a second deputy came down, I walked with him down to a secured room, they gave me a tag with a number on it for the key, and I locked up my firearm. The deputy asked me if I was doing jury duty, and I told him I was. He said I should take off my holster as well because, in his words, if people in jury room see an empty holster someone will freak out and call us.

    The deputy kept the key, I kept the card, and he escorted me back to the entrance. The key remained with the deputy there at the entrance desk, I passed through the metal detectors, and entered the courthouse now unescorted. Took all of but a few minutes. Same drill in reverse when I went out for lunch and left for the day.
    Ken Grubb
    Puyallup, WA

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gainesville, FL & Red Lodge, Montana
    Posts
    26
    Do you think you could modify your proposal to:
    1) specifically include banks an other financial institutions - i'v heard that somepeople go in there w/ guns to rob and shoot the place up.
    2) Churches - remember the minister that got blown away few months back?
    3) College campuses - it really gets me that I'm a "Trusted Individual" on one side of the street, but if I 'cross at the light'... no, no, you can't carry there.

  6. #5
    When I lived in PA they had a similar law about storage for the courts. My wife was able to secure her firearm there during jury duty. I was not afforded that same right here in Texas. We were all sheeple walking to/from the parking garage.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by MountainGator View Post
    Do you think you could modify your proposal to:
    1) specifically include banks an other financial institutions - i'v heard that somepeople go in there w/ guns to rob and shoot the place up.
    2) Churches - remember the minister that got blown away few months back?
    3) College campuses - it really gets me that I'm a "Trusted Individual" on one side of the street, but if I 'cross at the light'... no, no, you can't carry there.
    In TX if there is not a 30.06 sign at the bank you can go on in (at least the ones I have seen locally), same for churches.. Colleges.. well you have to leave it in the car.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    long island, ny
    Posts
    24
    why would banks anywhere be off limits. people take money there and carry to protect themselves. i live in ny and take my concealed gun to the bank all the time. no one sees it and no one asks.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    St. Louis/Missouri
    Posts
    578
    In the free state of Missouri it is legal to carry in any financial institution that is not posted. If it is posted I take my business elsewhere.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same. - Ronald Reagan

  10. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by mrwood3 View Post
    why would banks anywhere be off limits.
    Depends on the state. North Carolina prohibits carry into a financial institution.
    Ken Grubb
    Puyallup, WA

  11. #10
    You might add that they become financially liable for firearms-related violence that happens on site. If they're providing security, shouldn't they be liable for security lapses?

    I like the idea. In practice I think we all know that the politicians would never go for it. It makes too much sense for it to be law!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast